Solitary Fibrous Tumors of the Lung: A Clinicopathological Analysis of 52 Cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the clinicopathological features of solitary fibrous tumors (SFTs) of the lung. METHODS: We collected the clinical data of 52 patients with SFTs of the lung confirmed by pathology, and summarized the clinical, radiological, and morphological features, the immunophenotypes, and the prognosis of SFTs. RESULTS: Fifty-two cases of SFTs of the lung were enrolled in this study, including 51 cases of borderline and 1 case of malignancy, 22 males and 30 females. The average onset age was 52.7 years. The lower lobe of the left lung was the preferred site of SFTs, accounting for 30.77% (16/52). Chest CT showed regular and well-demarcated soft tissue density mass, and the tumor size of most cases (46/52, 88.46%) was 1-10 cm. Morphological features: The distribution of tumor cells showed sparse and dense areas. Tumor cells were spindle-shaped, in whorls or hemangiopericytoma-like conformation. Atypia, mitotic figures, and necrosis were found. Immunohistochemistry showed positive expression of CD34, STAT6, Vimentin, BCL2, and CD99. Ki-67 was ≤ 5% in borderline SFTs and >20% in a malignant SFT. CONCLUSIONS: Solitary fibrous tumors of the lung occur more frequently in middle-aged and elderly people, and there is no significant difference in gender. The lower lobe of the left lung is the preferred site of SFTs. The size of most SFTs is 1-10 cm. Chest CT shows morphologically regular and well-demarcated soft tissue density mass. Pathologically, SFTs of the lung are mostly borderline and occasionally malignant. Immunohistochemistry shows the positive expression of CD34, STAT6, Vimentin, BCL2, and CD99.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".